I don't imagine they support windows 98 or 95 either anymore.
Don't remind me of those dark times. First OS I used was DOS. Then spent what seems like forever in Windows 3.1. Never used Windows 95. My father finally upgraded when Windows 98 came out. Windows NT 4.0 and Windows 2000 worked well, but those two version of Windows were all work and no play.
as much as even I am behind the curve on upgrades, Ive had a win7 pc for a couple years now, I cant really say anything bad about anyone not supporting XP anymore... its just time.
My older laptop is from 2010 and runs Windows 10 fine. STO might not run pretty there, but it does run.
If you live in any semi-industrialized nation at all it should be a cake walk to find a computer newer then ten years old. No offense to certain people who do live in difficut areas (i know one) but this is pretty damn simple and not even that expensive for a used computer so i dont see what the fuss is about. If you like gaming you should not only expect this but be prepared for it.
I'm getting a hardware upgrade after new year anyways. A new mother board and processor with 2 8 gig DDR 3 sticks should improve game performance across the board
"The meaning of victory is not to merely defeat your enemy but to destroy him, to completely eradicate him from living memory, to leave no remnant of his endeavours, to crush utterly his achievement and remove from all record his every trace of existence. From that defeat no enemy can ever recover. That is the meaning of victory."
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
I find the notion of people wanting to use a Microsoft anything to be quite absurd, but I shan't judge. Still, Windows 7 is an adequate replacement for XP. It still uses a sensible UI and can support a more up-to-date DirectX. Windows 10 is spyware garbage.
It's not as much a matter of wanting to use Microsoft anything as it is a necessary evil.
There are no alternatives, Linux is not user friendly enough for the average consumer to adopt and Mac OS is restricted to Apple computers.
Linux is making a lot of progress in that regard. There are still some compatibility issues since most hardware is geared towards windows. For the majority of people i think that a dual boot or even a complete system under linux is a realistic option.
This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
To the OP: Windows XP was released 15 years ago. That means there are kids who were born the same time as your OS, and the same kids will be doing their school leaving exams next year (depending on country of course)!
Buy a new machine dude, XP isn't even supported by the people who made it and haven't done for years.
With XP, you are just flogging a dead horse. it's nearly Christmas, so ask mum & dad for a new machine for a present.
That requires doubling the size of all of your pointers, bloating your code. You get more registers, and some guarantees as to what floating point hardware's available, at the cost of higher memory usage, and cache misses are a big speed concern. Microsoft's C++ compiler is still 32 bit, for example.
Another reason to drop XP support is tools availability going forward. More modern runtimes don't support XP, so Cryptic couldn't move to the current generation of compilers.
I've heard the claim that x64 Bit software might be slower or require more RAM, but everything I could find on it is that this is a pretty outdated notion.
Being able to address more memory is usually a big boon when it comes to performance. Having to load stuff from hard disk again is considerably more expensive then some cache misses.
Personally, I am working on a C++ software that works on Mac, Linux, Windows, both 32 and 64 Bit (well, not for Mac anymore), and the x64 und x32 use the same code base. Of course, IIRC, STO is built mostly with C and certainly has harder performance requirements in many aspects, so that might be a difference.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Good 'ol Windows XP... longest OS I have used; from 2001 thru 2010.
Upgraded to Win 7 after SP1 was released. Win 8 / 8.1 was meh... only used it because it was the default OS for the laptop I purchased back in 2014. Win 10 is better than Win 8.1 I suppose, but I liked Win 7's interface better.
That requires doubling the size of all of your pointers, bloating your code. You get more registers, and some guarantees as to what floating point hardware's available, at the cost of higher memory usage, and cache misses are a big speed concern.
64-bit code will generally run faster, by about 10%. These days there's no longer a valid reason to run a 32-bit OS. Doesn't mean Cryptic should immediately drop 32-bit support, though.
The largest stigma with Linux is with it's purists. People wanting it to stay complex and programming-heavy so that only those who know how to use it actually use it. Even with Ubuntu if you go too long on just LTS updates eventually you'll need to reinstall the OS to clean up the file trees. People coming from Windows have a pointed aversion to having to reinstall the OS on a regular basis, preferring it just update and be done with it (something Microsoft tried to take advantage of with their 'free' Windows 10 upgrade program). In order for Linux to truly enjoy mass appeal it needs to be more welcoming of the non'true believers'.
That requires doubling the size of all of your pointers, bloating your code. You get more registers, and some guarantees as to what floating point hardware's available, at the cost of higher memory usage, and cache misses are a big speed concern.
64-bit code will generally run faster, by about 10%. These days there's no longer a valid reason to run a 32-bit OS. Doesn't mean Cryptic should immediately drop 32-bit support, though.
Financial reasons are often a factor, parts are expensive for people on a low income.
"The meaning of victory is not to merely defeat your enemy but to destroy him, to completely eradicate him from living memory, to leave no remnant of his endeavours, to crush utterly his achievement and remove from all record his every trace of existence. From that defeat no enemy can ever recover. That is the meaning of victory."
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
As much as I loved Windows XP, it's time has well passed now. Anyone still using it is frankly leaving themselves open to vulnerabilities in the code since Microsoft hasn't given it any security updates, or updates of any time for quite a while now. Windows 7 is still a great OS and I plan on using it for a while yet before eventually upgrading. I did try to upgrade to Windows 10 but in typical Microsoft fashion windows updates wouldn't work! Thus the deadline passed and wouldn't let me download it for free, and I'll be damned if I'm paying for an OS most got for free! The only real downside to leaving DX9 behind is the people who still defiantly keep playing on OS X with Wine might be out of luck, I read that people were having quite a few issues getting it to play nicely with DX11.
Looking for a dedicated Star Trek community? Visit www.ufplanets.com for details.
I don't imagine they support windows 98 or 95 either anymore.
I still have my Windows 3.1 install floppy disks upstairs somewhere, I doubt they support that either. Nostalgia though, imagine most people having to go through command prompt just to load the Windows OS. They'd have a fit.
Looking for a dedicated Star Trek community? Visit www.ufplanets.com for details.
That requires doubling the size of all of your pointers, bloating your code. You get more registers, and some guarantees as to what floating point hardware's available, at the cost of higher memory usage, and cache misses are a big speed concern. Microsoft's C++ compiler is still 32 bit, for example.
Another reason to drop XP support is tools availability going forward. More modern runtimes don't support XP, so Cryptic couldn't move to the current generation of compilers.
I've heard the claim that x64 Bit software might be slower or require more RAM, but everything I could find on it is that this is a pretty outdated notion.
Being able to address more memory is usually a big boon when it comes to performance. Having to load stuff from hard disk again is considerably more expensive then some cache misses.
Personally, I am working on a C++ software that works on Mac, Linux, Windows, both 32 and 64 Bit (well, not for Mac anymore), and the x64 und x32 use the same code base. Of course, IIRC, STO is built mostly with C and certainly has harder performance requirements in many aspects, so that might be a difference.
64 bit code is bigger, simply because pointers are twice as large (plus there are some alignment issues that may or may not affect a particular piece of code). The upside is that you get more general purpose registers, and you're guaranteed a modern floating point unit. Going from 32 bit to 64 bit code should be straightforward, assuming that you have clean code, and aren't doing fancy floating point stuff. (Which means going through your code, or running it through lint to make sure that you don't cast a pointer to int.)
If their runtime supports it, they could set a flag on the executable to use up to 4 gig of memory and stay 32 bit.
I'm mostly C# these days, but I've done C, C++, Delphi, PowerBuilder and PostScript in the past.
If someone hasn't upgraded from WinXP nearly two years AFTER MS completely abandoned further support for it (not to mention every other hardware developer with regard to Drivers)...
It's amazing Cryptic maintained STO client compatibility for Win XP as long as they did.
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
I realize not everyone is in the USA, but today you can get a laptop for $199 that will run STO at low settings. Plus it will replace that 10 year old XP doorstop that's probably a slow, erratic and virus-infested mess.
Im running a 2009 Windows vista, which has also lost support from Microsoft. It has no viruses, is not slow, and is not "eratic". The best thing about it is...it will run STO. I will give you all the specs of my computer so you can have a good laugh.
The only problems I have with running the game on this computer is Bughunt and the Helrald Story arc. Slight loss in frame rate at other "fast paced" moments. Like you said, you don't need that great of a computer to play this game.
[quote] I'm mostly C# these days, but I've done C, C++, Delphi, PowerBuilder and PostScript in the past.[/quote]
Frighteningly, as of 2014 the Oregon state dhs main database and core software are all sybase/power builder. The Texas comptroller and workforce commission are both running cobol. And hawaii's department of health has a critical system written in Delphi 4. I know because as a contractor I won bids to have people upgrade these systems that year.
I play Star Trek Online, today this message has appeared, and have no intention of buying a new video card. I checked and my graphics card is compatible. So this is a WINE build issue? This is not just an XP issue it is saying Linux and Mac users can GTFO.
I play Star Trek Online, today this message has appeared, and have no intention of buying a new video card. I checked and my graphics card is compatible. So this is a WINE build issue? This is not just an XP issue it is saying Linux and Mac users can GTFO.
Any Linux users have a work around on this issue?
I do not use Linux, but yes, it is a WINE build issue. The current version of WINE has not fully implemented support for DirectX 10 or 11 yet. Based on the following link, it is very much a work in progress.
I will just have to say adios. I am not blaming anyone here or at Cryptic. Linux is my choice of OS, I am not about to go back into the stone age with Microsoft.
The largest stigma with Linux is with it's purists. People wanting it to stay complex and programming-heavy so that only those who know how to use it actually use it. Even with Ubuntu if you go too long on just LTS updates eventually you'll need to reinstall the OS to clean up the file trees. People coming from Windows have a pointed aversion to having to reinstall the OS on a regular basis, preferring it just update and be done with it (something Microsoft tried to take advantage of with their 'free' Windows 10 upgrade program). In order for Linux to truly enjoy mass appeal it needs to be more welcoming of the non'true believers'.
Some distributions are on-going and don't need reinstallation.
Also, many distros are more user-friendly than Windows. There is no "one" Linux from a user's point of view. Distros are diverse and differ from one another.
Another point that someone may not want to download many different ones to test them live, which can be a bother and time consuming.
I use only Linux, so I have no idea what I'm going to do in March. Bloating my computer with Windows just for 1 game (while others run fine on POL/Wine) is not something I want to do.
I'm mostly C# these days, but I've done C, C++, Delphi, PowerBuilder and PostScript in the past.
Frighteningly, as of 2014 the Oregon state dhs main database and core software are all sybase/power builder. The Texas comptroller and workforce commission are both running cobol. And hawaii's department of health has a critical system written in Delphi 4. I know because as a contractor I won bids to have people upgrade these systems that year.
PowerBuilder's probably the best client/server development environment that I've seen. I also have fond memories of Delphi. (Almost as powerful as C++, but easier to read, and an insanely fast compiler.) The biggest bit of coding WTFery I've seen (and it's been highlighted on the Daily WTF) was written in C++ using CORBA.
Anywho, getting back to XP, after the next round of security updates to our public web sites, they're going to refuse connections from all versions of Internet Explorer that XP can run. I expect that others will follow. (We're going to only support TLS 1.2, which XP doesn't support at all.)
Frighteningly, as of 2014 the Oregon state dhs main database and core software are all sybase/power builder. The Texas comptroller and workforce commission are both running cobol. And hawaii's department of health has a critical system written in Delphi 4. I know because as a contractor I won bids to have people upgrade these systems that year.
And we use WinXP for our amazingly hackable electronic voting machines here in the USA.
I will just have to say adios. I am not blaming anyone here or at Cryptic. Linux is my choice of OS, I am not about to go back into the stone age with Microsoft.
If the limitation is WINE development I imagine this will affect many people, no? Doesn't that mean it is the *IX community that is "back in the stone age"? I expect the WINE folks will sort it.
Linux is making a lot of progress in that regard. There are still some compatibility issues since most hardware is geared towards windows. For the majority of people i think that a dual boot or even a complete system under linux is a realistic option.
I can see "normal" users switching to Linux, especially when it may come preinstalled on standard computers you just buy at the store. I don't see many using a dual boot though. I guess not too many people want to decide "what to use now", they want their computer, it should work, and require as little maintenance or setting up as possible.
My mother was an epohh and my father smelled of tulaberries
Comments
Don't remind me of those dark times. First OS I used was DOS. Then spent what seems like forever in Windows 3.1. Never used Windows 95. My father finally upgraded when Windows 98 came out. Windows NT 4.0 and Windows 2000 worked well, but those two version of Windows were all work and no play.
My older laptop is from 2010 and runs Windows 10 fine. STO might not run pretty there, but it does run.
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
Linux is making a lot of progress in that regard. There are still some compatibility issues since most hardware is geared towards windows. For the majority of people i think that a dual boot or even a complete system under linux is a realistic option.
Buy a new machine dude, XP isn't even supported by the people who made it and haven't done for years.
With XP, you are just flogging a dead horse. it's nearly Christmas, so ask mum & dad for a new machine for a present.
I've heard the claim that x64 Bit software might be slower or require more RAM, but everything I could find on it is that this is a pretty outdated notion.
Being able to address more memory is usually a big boon when it comes to performance. Having to load stuff from hard disk again is considerably more expensive then some cache misses.
Personally, I am working on a C++ software that works on Mac, Linux, Windows, both 32 and 64 Bit (well, not for Mac anymore), and the x64 und x32 use the same code base. Of course, IIRC, STO is built mostly with C and certainly has harder performance requirements in many aspects, so that might be a difference.
Upgraded to Win 7 after SP1 was released. Win 8 / 8.1 was meh... only used it because it was the default OS for the laptop I purchased back in 2014. Win 10 is better than Win 8.1 I suppose, but I liked Win 7's interface better.
64-bit code will generally run faster, by about 10%. These days there's no longer a valid reason to run a 32-bit OS. Doesn't mean Cryptic should immediately drop 32-bit support, though.
Financial reasons are often a factor, parts are expensive for people on a low income.
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
"-Grind is good!" --Gordon Geko
Accolades checklist: https://bit.ly/FLUFFYS
According to the following link, it seems support for DirectX 10 and 11 in Wine is still under development.
https://www.winehq.org/winapi_stats
Looking for a dedicated Star Trek community? Visit www.ufplanets.com for details.
I still have my Windows 3.1 install floppy disks upstairs somewhere, I doubt they support that either. Nostalgia though, imagine most people having to go through command prompt just to load the Windows OS. They'd have a fit.
Looking for a dedicated Star Trek community? Visit www.ufplanets.com for details.
64 bit code is bigger, simply because pointers are twice as large (plus there are some alignment issues that may or may not affect a particular piece of code). The upside is that you get more general purpose registers, and you're guaranteed a modern floating point unit. Going from 32 bit to 64 bit code should be straightforward, assuming that you have clean code, and aren't doing fancy floating point stuff. (Which means going through your code, or running it through lint to make sure that you don't cast a pointer to int.)
If their runtime supports it, they could set a flag on the executable to use up to 4 gig of memory and stay 32 bit.
I'm mostly C# these days, but I've done C, C++, Delphi, PowerBuilder and PostScript in the past.
It's amazing Cryptic maintained STO client compatibility for Win XP as long as they did.
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Im running a 2009 Windows vista, which has also lost support from Microsoft. It has no viruses, is not slow, and is not "eratic". The best thing about it is...it will run STO. I will give you all the specs of my computer so you can have a good laugh.
CPU: 2.2GHz Intel Celeron 900 (Single Core [1Logical])
Operating System: MS Windows Vista Basic with SP1
Graphix Card: Intel GMA 4500M
Ram: 3Gb
Hard Drive Size: 250Gb
Video Memory: 1.3Gb
The only problems I have with running the game on this computer is Bughunt and the Helrald Story arc. Slight loss in frame rate at other "fast paced" moments. Like you said, you don't need that great of a computer to play this game.
I'm mostly C# these days, but I've done C, C++, Delphi, PowerBuilder and PostScript in the past.[/quote]
Frighteningly, as of 2014 the Oregon state dhs main database and core software are all sybase/power builder. The Texas comptroller and workforce commission are both running cobol. And hawaii's department of health has a critical system written in Delphi 4. I know because as a contractor I won bids to have people upgrade these systems that year.
Any Linux users have a work around on this issue?
I do not use Linux, but yes, it is a WINE build issue. The current version of WINE has not fully implemented support for DirectX 10 or 11 yet. Based on the following link, it is very much a work in progress.
https://www.winehq.org/winapi_stats
no, Im cheap and even I upgraded about 3.5yrs ago... anyone still using it is probably there because they're just boned financially.
Live Long and Prosper
Some distributions are on-going and don't need reinstallation.
Also, many distros are more user-friendly than Windows. There is no "one" Linux from a user's point of view. Distros are diverse and differ from one another.
Another point that someone may not want to download many different ones to test them live, which can be a bother and time consuming.
I use only Linux, so I have no idea what I'm going to do in March. Bloating my computer with Windows just for 1 game (while others run fine on POL/Wine) is not something I want to do.
PowerBuilder's probably the best client/server development environment that I've seen. I also have fond memories of Delphi. (Almost as powerful as C++, but easier to read, and an insanely fast compiler.) The biggest bit of coding WTFery I've seen (and it's been highlighted on the Daily WTF) was written in C++ using CORBA.
Anywho, getting back to XP, after the next round of security updates to our public web sites, they're going to refuse connections from all versions of Internet Explorer that XP can run. I expect that others will follow. (We're going to only support TLS 1.2, which XP doesn't support at all.)
I can see "normal" users switching to Linux, especially when it may come preinstalled on standard computers you just buy at the store. I don't see many using a dual boot though. I guess not too many people want to decide "what to use now", they want their computer, it should work, and require as little maintenance or setting up as possible.